Is R10 or a brand new Digital-R coming ?

[Likaleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Paul & Doug, I have heard the same sentiments from other professional nature photographers. It is difficult to earn a living in this field because of the plethora of good digital images. Reminds me of the bear viewing platforms in Katmai where 20 people stand shoulder to shoulder, all with the same camera and supertelephoto lens, fingers pressed to shutter release and shutters whizzing at 8 fps. Shoot a thousand frames with a fully automated camera and some are going to turn out good, no matter who you are.

 

To get back on the subject of this forum, I'd like to add my two cents to a few issues.

 

Auto focus. Unnecessary in the R10. It is useful only when photographing moving objects. You don't need AF to photograph a barn or a tree or a stilllife. Moving subjects are usually people or animals, and the point that usually needs to be in critical focus is the eye. But, by the time you focus on the eye, then swing the camera to recompose, the subject has moved, and the eye is out of focus. Also pertinent is the DOF change as discussed earlier in this forum. Better to compose and focus on a bright ground glass. If you need multipoint AF, buy a Nikon or Canon.

 

Competition with Nikon & Canon. Leica isn't competing with them now, so why should they start with AF and all the other stuff? Leica could never make what N&C make, because of their manufacturing process. N&C have huge factories that stamp out cameras automatically on machines by the hundreds of thousands. Leica cameras & lenses are carefully hand made in a single facility smaller than a Walmart store, and well worth the trip to Solms to tour. It's worth buying Leica just to help keep alive this kind of individual craftsmanship.

 

DMR2. Because a Leica camera is nothing like a Nikon or Canon, I think the DMR idea is still viable. Maybe not to switch back and forth between film and digital. But it seems reasonable to construct a camera such that the digital module can be factory swapped out for upgrades. Spend $5000 on a camera now, and upgrade it in two years for $1500, rather than buy an entire new camera. Because of Leica's manufacturing methods, I would think this would be more efficient, rather than to tool up entire new cameras every couple of years, like N&C do. A camera based on the R9 with a smaller, lighter DMR that is semi-permanent makes more sense to me, but I admit I know absolutely nothing about manufacturing.

[wlaidlaw]

Tim,

 

I am wholly convinced you are wrong about AF. Whereas you or I might not want AF (and having been using a Nikon D200 recently, where I was VERY impressed, I am not sure that I would not want AF), there are lots of people out there who might lust after a Leica DSLR but would not consider it without AF. It would be a huge marketing mistake not to have AF facility. The obvious answer, is again to go the Nikon route of backwards compatibility with MF lenses, then everyone is happy. I would go for Piezo motors in the lenses so as not to increase the body weight and complication with focusing motors in the body. The next controversy is IS. Do you have it? Do you put it in the body? Maybe not if space is tight with an FF sensor. Are there enough contacts on the R system lens to allow for it to go in the lenses. The downside is is would make an already heavy and bulky AF lens even heavier and bulkier - just look at the size of the standard D3 lens and it is not even very fast nor is it full frame image circle.

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[paulmoore]

I think having both af and mf,( with no compromises to the existing quality of mf ) leica would not be in competition with the rising sun cameras..you would see an exodus from them by the photographers who appreciate the difference but need to have af..and this is not just a handful..I am sure leica has done the market research to back up their decisions, though they have not asked me!

I don't need af but wouldn't mind if it was there to make the camera more appealing to others..there are always features on cameras that I never need to use.. hot shoe for one.

But do I care if it is there? no.

I have no interest in some sort of film/digital hybrid - in the commercial world I live in, it is a digital medium, there is no going back, so give me a camera that is built for that and do it in the leica tradition..there is no competition to that..

By moving the sensor up in size, you are also looking at taking some medium format guys as customers.. the quality is good enough for some of these users to downsize to a high quality small camera.. a lot have switched to canon already. I use both the rollei 6008 and the rollei xact2 view camera and r10 would replace most of the 6008's duties.

and I am one of those crazies who would welcome a jumbo 4/3 format..while not losing the r mount...supersize it for me please. we all can crop to 2/3 if so desired..let that now sprocketless format be for the m.

[rosuna]

DMR2. Because a Leica camera is nothing like a Nikon or Canon, I think the DMR idea is still viable. Maybe not to switch back and forth between film and digital. But it seems reasonable to construct a camera such that the digital module can be factory swapped out for upgrades. Spend $5000 on a camera now, and upgrade it in two years for $1500, rather than buy an entire new camera. Because of Leica's manufacturing methods, I would think this would be more efficient, rather than to tool up entire new cameras every couple of years, like N&C do. A camera based on the R9 with a smaller, lighter DMR that is semi-permanent makes more sense to me, but I admit I know absolutely nothing about manufacturing.

 

This is a good idea and maybe Nikon is working on it.